The cost-effectiveness of celecoxib versus non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs plus proton-pump inhibitors in the treatment of osteoarthritis in Saudi Arabia

Background: Cyclooxygenase (COX)-2 inhibitors including celecoxib are as effective as non-selective non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (ns-NSAIDs) in the treatment of osteoarthritis (OA) and have less gastrointestinal toxicity. Although they are associated with higher treatment costs, COX-2 inhibitors may simultaneously reduce costs associated with adverse events, hence, their overall economic benefit should be assessed. Objective: To evaluate the incremental cost effectiveness ratio (ICER) of celecoxib versus ns-NSAIDs, with/without proton-pump inhibitor (PPI) co-therapy, for managing OA in Saudi Arabian subjects aged Ï65 years. Methods: The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence health economic model from the UK, updated with relative risks of adverse events using CONDOR trial data, was adapted. Patients received celecoxib or ns-NSAIDs, with/without omeprazole. The effectiveness measure was quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained per patient. The analysis was conducted from the patient's perspective. Frequencies of resource use for adverse events were based on data collected in July 2012 from seven private hospitals in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis was performed to construct cost-effectiveness acceptability curves (CEACs). Results: Over a 6-month treatment duration, QALYs gained per patient were higher with celecoxib (0.37) and celecoxib plus PPI (0.40) versus comparators. Ibuprofen plus PPI showed the lowest expected cost per patient (US$1,314.50 versus US$ 1,422.80 with celecoxib plus PPI and US$1,543.50 with celecoxib). Celecoxib plus PPI was the most cost-effective option with an ICER of US$ 1,805.00, followed by celecoxib (ICER, US$7,633.33) versus ibuprofen plus PPI. Over 2- and 5-year treatment durations, celecoxib plus PPI, and celecoxib, showed higher QALYs gained/patient and lower ICERs versus comparators. These ICERs are <1 gross domestic product/capita in Saudi Arabia in 2013 (US$ 25,961). CEACs over 6 months' treatment showed a significantly higher likelihood that celecoxib plus PPI and celecoxib alone would be more cost effective versus comparators once the willingness to pay is over US$ 2,000.00. Conclusion: After considering new adverse event risks, celecoxib with/without PPI co-therapy was deemed very cost effective for medium- and long-term use in Saudi Arabian OA patients aged Ï65 years

The cost-effectiveness of an adjuvanted quadrivalent influenza vaccine in the United Kingdom

In the United Kingdom (UK), both the MF59-adjuvanted quadrivalent influenza vaccine (aQIV) and the high-dose QIV (QIV-HD) are preferred for persons aged 65 years and older but only aQIV is reimbursed by the National Health Service (NHS). The objective was to determine the potential cost-effectiveness of vaccinating adults aged 65 years and above with aQIV compared with QIV-HD in the UK. A dynamic transmission model, calibrated to match infection data from the UK, was used to estimate the impact of vaccination in 10 influenza seasons. Vaccine effectiveness was based on a meta-analysis that concluded the vaccines were not significantly different. Vaccine coverage, physician visits, hospitalizations, deaths, utility losses and NHS costs were estimated using published UK sources. The list price of aQIV was £11.88 while a range of prices were tested for QIV-HD. The price of the trivalent high-dose vaccine (TIV-HD) is £20.00 but a list price for QIV-HD is not yet available. The projected differences between the vaccines in terms of clinical cases and influenza treatment costs are minimal. Our analysis demonstrates that in order to be cost-effective, the price of QIV-HD must be similar to that of aQIV and may range from £7.57 to £12.94 depending on the relative effectiveness of the vaccines. The results of the analysis were most sensitive to variation in vaccine effectiveness and the rate of hospitalization due to influenza. Given the evidence, aQIV is cost-saving unless QIV-HD is priced lower than the existing list price of TIV-HD

Evaluating the Relative Vaccine Effectiveness of Adjuvanted Trivalent Influenza Vaccine Compared to High-Dose Trivalent and Other Egg-Based Influenza Vaccines among Older Adults in the US during the 2017-2018 Influenza Season

The influenza-related disease burden is highest among the elderly. We evaluated the relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE) of adjuvanted trivalent influenza vaccine (aTIV) compared to other egg-based influenza vaccines (high-dose trivalent (TIV-HD), quadrivalent (QIVe-SD), and standard-dose trivalent (TIVe-SD)) against influenza-related and cardio-respiratory events among subjects aged >= 65 years for the 2017-2018 influenza season. This retrospective cohort analysis used prescription claims, professional fee claims, and hospital charge master data. Influenza-related hospitalizations/ER visits and office visits and cardio-respiratory events were assessed post-vaccination. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) and Poisson regression were used to evaluate the adjusted rVE of aTIV compared to other vaccines. In an economic analysis, annualized follow-up costs were compared between aTIV and TIV-HD. The study was composed of 234,313 aTIV, 1,269,855 TIV-HD, 212,287 QIVe-SD, and 106,491 TIVe-SD recipients. aTIV was more effective in reducing influenza-related office visits and other respiratory-related hospitalizations/ER visits compared to the other vaccines. For influenza-related hospitalizations/ER visits, aTIV was associated with a significantly higher rVE compared to QIVe-SD and TIVe-SD and was comparable to TIV-HD. aTIV was also associated with a significantly higher rVE compared to TIVe-SD against hospitalizations/ER visits related to pneumonia and asthma/COPD/bronchial events. aTIV and TIV-HD were associated with comparable annualized all-cause and influenza-related costs. Adjusted analyses demonstrated a significant benefit of aTIV against influenza- and respiratory-related events compared to the other egg-based vaccines

A retrospective cohort study assessing relative effectiveness of adjuvanted versus high-dose trivalent influenza vaccines among older adults in the United States during the 2018-19 influenza season

Purpose: To evaluate the relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE) against influenza-related hospitalizations/ emergency room (ER) visits, influenza-related office visits, and cardio-respiratory disease (CRD)-related hospitalizations/ER visits and compare all-cause and influenza-related costs associated with two vaccines specifically indicated for older adults (>= 65 years), adjuvanted (aTIV) and high-dose trivalent influenza vaccine (TIV-HD), for the 2018-19 influenza season. Methods: A retrospective analysis of older adults was conducted using claims and hospital data in the United States. For clinical evaluations, adjusted analyses were conducted following inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) to control for selection bias. Poisson regression was used to estimate the adjusted rVE against influenza-related hospitalizations/ER visits, influenza-related office visits, and any CRD-related hospitalizations/ER visits. For the economic evaluation, treatment selection bias was adjusted through 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM). All-cause and influenza-related costs associated with hospitalizations/ER, physician office and pharmacy visits were adjusted using generalized estimating equation (GEE) models. Results: After IPTW and Poisson regression, aTIV (n = 561,315) was slightly more effective in reducing influenza-related office visits compared to TIV-HD (n = 1,672,779) (6.6%; 95% CI: 2.8-10.3%). aTIV was statistically comparable to TIV-HD (2.0%; 95% CI: -3.7%-7.3%) in preventing influenza-related hospitalizations/ER visits but more effective in reducing hospitalizations/ER visits for any CRD (2.6%; 95% CI: 2.0-3.2%). In the PSM-adjusted cohorts (n = 561,243 pairs), following GEE adjustments, predicted mean annualized all-cause and influenza-related total costs per patient were statistically similar between aTIV and TIV-HD (US$9676 vs. US$9625 and US$18.74 vs. US$17.28, respectively; both p > 0.05). Finally, influenza-related pharmacy costs were slightly lower for aTIV as compared to TIV-HD ($1.75 vs$1.85; p = 65 were comparable between aTIV and TIV-HD. aTIV was slightly more effective in preventing influenza-related office visits and any CRD event as compared to TIV-HD in this population. (C) 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd

Clinical and Economic Outcomes Associated with Cell-Based Quadrivalent Influenza Vaccine vs. Standard-Dose Egg-Based Quadrivalent Influenza Vaccines during the 2018-19 Influenza Season in the United States

Non-egg-based influenza vaccines eliminate the potential for egg-adapted mutations and potentially increase vaccine effectiveness. This retrospective study compared hospitalizations/emergency room (ER) visits and all-cause annualized healthcare costs among subjects aged 4-64 years who received cell-based quadrivalent (QIVc) or standard-dose egg-based quadrivalent (QIVe-SD) influenza vaccine during the 2018-19 influenza season. Administrative claims data (IQVIA PharMetrics(R) Plus, IQVIA, USA) were utilized to evaluate clinical and economic outcomes. Adjusted relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE) of QIVc vs. QIVe-SD among overall cohort, as well as for three subgroups (age 4-17 years, age 18-64 years, and high-risk) was evaluated using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) and Poisson regression models. Generalized estimating equation models among the propensity score matched sample were used to estimate annualized all-cause costs. A total of 669,030 recipients of QIVc and 3,062,797 of QIVe-SD were identified after IPTW adjustments. Among the overall cohort, QIVc had higher adjusted rVEs against hospitalizations/ER visits related to influenza, all-cause hospitalizations, and hospitalizations/ER visits associated with any respiratory event compared to QIVe-SD. The adjusted annualized all-cause total costs were higher for QIVe-SD compared to QIVc ((+$461); p < 0.05)

Comparing the Clinical and Economic Outcomes Associated with Adjuvanted versus High-Dose Trivalent Influenza Vaccine among Adults Aged ≥ 65 Years in the US during the 2019-20 Influenza Season:A Retrospective Cohort Analysis

The burden of influenza is disproportionally higher among older adults. We evaluated the relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE) of adjuvanted trivalent (aIIV3) compared to high-dose trivalent influenza vaccine (HD-IIV3e) against influenza and cardio-respiratory disease (CRD)-related hospitalizations/ER visits among adults ≥65 years during the 2019–2020 influenza season. Economic outcomes were also compared. A retrospective cohort analysis was conducted using prescription, professional fee claims, and hospital data. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was used to adjust for confounding. IPTW-adjusted Poisson regression was used to evaluate the adjusted rVE of aIIV3 versus HD-IIV3e. All-cause and influenza-related healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) and costs were examined post-IPTW. Recycled predictions from generalized linear models were used to estimate adjusted costs. Adjusted analysis showed that aIIV3 (n = 798,987) was similarly effective compared to HD-IIV3e (n = 1,655,979) in preventing influenza-related hospitalizations/ER visits (rVE 3.1%; 95% CI: −2.8%; 8.6%), hospitalizations due to any cause (−0.7%; 95% CI: −1.6%; 0.3%), and any CRD-related hospitalization/ER visit (0.9%; 95% CI: 0.01%; 1.7%). Adjusted HCRU and annualized costs were also statistically insignificant between the two cohorts. The adjusted clinical and economic outcomes evaluated in this study were comparable between aIIV3 and HD-IIV3e during the 2019–2020 influenza season

The Cost-Effectiveness of Expanding Vaccination with a Cell-Based Influenza Vaccine to Low Risk Adults Aged 50 to 64 Years in the United Kingdom

Background: In response to COVID-19, the UK National Health Service (NHS) extended influenza vaccination in 50- to 64-year-olds from at-risk only to all in this age group for the 2020/21 season. The objective of this research is to determine the cost-effectiveness of continuing to vaccinate all with a quadrivalent cell-based vaccine (QIVc) compared to returning to an at-risk only policy after the pandemic resolves. Methods: A dynamic transmission model, calibrated to match infection data from the UK, was used to estimate the clinical and economic impact of vaccination across 10 influenza seasons. The base case effectiveness of QIVc was 63.9% and the list price was GBP 9.94. Results: Vaccinating 50% of all 50- to 64-year-olds with QIVc reduced the average annual number of clinical infections (−682,000), hospitalizations (−5800) and deaths (−740) in the UK. The base case incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained (ICER) of all compared to at-risk only was GBP6000 (NHS perspective). When the cost of lost productivity was considered, vaccinating all 50-to 64-year-olds with QIVc became cost-saving. Conclusion: Vaccinating all 50- to 64-year-olds with QIVc is likely to be cost-effective. The NHS should consider continuing this policy in future seasons

A Real-World Clinical and Economic Analysis of Cell-Derived Quadrivalent Influenza Vaccine Compared to Standard Egg-Derived Quadrivalent Influenza Vaccines During the 2019-2020 Influenza Season in the United States

BACKGROUND: Cell-derived influenza vaccines are not subject to egg-adaptive mutations that have potential to decrease vaccine effectiveness. This retrospective analysis estimated the relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE) of cell-derived quadrivalent influenza vaccine (IIV4c) compared to standard egg-derived quadrivalent influenza vaccines (IIV4e) among recipients aged 4–64 years in the United States during the 2019–2020 influenza season. METHODS: The IQVIA PharMetrics Plus administrative claims database was utilized. Study outcomes were assessed postvaccination through the end of the study period (7 March 2020). Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was implemented to adjust for covariate imbalance. Adjusted rVE against influenza-related hospitalizations/emergency room (ER) visits and other clinical outcomes was estimated through IPTW-weighted Poisson regression models for the IIV4c and IIV4e cohorts and for the subgroup with ≥1 high-risk condition. Sensitivity analyses modifying the outcome assessment period as well as a doubly-robust analysis were also conducted. IPTW-weighted generalized linear models were used to estimate predicted annualized all-cause costs. RESULTS: The final sample comprised 1 150 134 IIV4c and 3 924 819 IIV4e recipients following IPTW adjustment. IIV4c was more effective in preventing influenza-related hospitalizations/ER visits as well as respiratory-related hospitalizations/ER visits compared to IIV4e. IIV4c was also more effective for the high-risk subgroup and across the sensitivity analyses. IIV4c was also associated with significantly lower annualized all-cause total costs compared to IIV4e (–$467), driven by lower costs for outpatient medical services and inpatient hospitalizations. CONCLUSIONS: IIV4c was significantly more effective in preventing influenza-related hospitalizations/ER visits compared to IIV4e and was associated with significantly lower all-cause costs

Cost-Effectiveness of Vaccination of Older Adults with an MF59®-Adjuvanted Quadrivalent Influenza Vaccine Compared to Standard-Dose and High-Dose Vaccines in Denmark, Norway, and Sweden

Individuals aged 65 years and above are at increased risk of complications and death from influenza compared with any other age group. Enhanced vaccines, as the MF59®-adjuvanted quadrivalent influenza vaccine (aQIV) and the high-dose quadrivalent influenza vaccine (HD-QIV), provide increased protection for older adults in comparison to the traditional standard-dose quadrivalent influenza vaccines (SD-QIV). This study aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of aQIV compared to SD-QIV and HD-QIV in Denmark, Norway, and Sweden for adults aged ≥65 years. A static decision tree model was used to evaluate costs and outcomes of different vaccination strategies from healthcare payer and societal perspectives. This model projects that compared to SD-QIV, vaccination with aQIV could prevent a combined total of 18,772 symptomatic influenza infections, 925 hospitalizations, and 161 deaths in one influenza season across the three countries. From a healthcare payer perspective, the incremental costs per quality adjusted life year (QALY) gained with aQIV versus SD-QIV were EUR 10,170/QALY in Denmark, EUR 12,515/QALY in Norway, and EUR 9894/QALY in Sweden. The aQIV was cost saving compared with HD-QIV. This study found that introducing aQIV to the entire population aged ≥65 years may contribute to reducing the disease and economic burden associated with influenza in these countries.publishedVersio